• Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    9 months ago

    The thing about those big kite sails is the wind has to be coming from pretty much astern for them to work; if the ship is sailing into even a quartering headwind they’re of no use.

    There’s a technology…I forget what they’re called, some kind of turbine, where you have a couple of tall spinning cylinders on the deck, which interact with the wind in such a way to provide thrust for the ship, this is mechanically simpler, fewer ways it can go wrong, you can just hinge them down and secure them in a storm or to pass under bridges, and they can drive the ship in quartering headwinds.

    • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I’ve seen kiteboarders able to go in pretty much whatever direction they want as long as there is wind. These kites are the same thing but bigger.

      That said, idk if cargo companies really want to be adding distance to the trip by tacking back and forth into the wind. My impression is that they want to get there ASAP and screw the fuel consumption.

      • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 months ago

        They will slow down to conserve fuel, because when you’re burning it at the quantities these ships do you’re talking millions of dollars per voyage, and especially if you’re going to end up waiting in line like you do at American ports…why hurry?

        • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Because faster trips means more trips per year. Even if the margins per trip is lower due to increased fuel consumption, quarterly revenue is higher. Even if significant time is waiting at port.

          That said, I don’t work in the logistics industry, so I don’t have the number to say how much the difference would be.

          • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            By why hurry I mean, why rush to cross the Pacific ocean only to have to wait at anchor for a dock to become available in Los Angeles harbor?

            There’s an old law, been on the books since the 19th century, that requires ships traveling between US ports to be US registered and be crewed by mostly US citizens. This causes a problem in the modern day because…imagine you’ve got one of those gigantic containerships leaving Asia for the US, the ship is owned by who gives a shit and the crew was chosen practically at random from citizens of the world. In a sane world, you could plan the trip to visit several ports along the US coast, dropping off cargo from Asia at each where it’s most convenient, and loading cargo that’s going to your next port of call. Well unless the ship is American, this is illegal, which makes the United States a complete fucking problem, which is why tthere are just…containerships hanging around outside US ports waiting to offload ALL of their cargo whether it makes sense or not, taking on whatever’s at this particular port, and then leaving the Western hemisphere again.

            • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Huh, I assumed the queue was first-come-first-served, are you telling me that these ships reserve a time at a port in advance? That’d make sense, and in that case you’re right it only makes sense to arrive there just in time for your reservation. But if it’s FIFO then it still makes sense to get there ASAP even if you’re waiting, because arriving later doesn’t make the wait shorter.

              Wrt USA being a problem, I feel like that’s probably true of every industry lol